Reflections Number 24 Reflections October 2008

The BRI Newsletter Reflections Number 24 Reflections October 2008

Messiah Stone Scrutinized the 87-line Hebrew inscription, which has been dated by Ada Yardeni and Binyamin Elitzur to the late first century B.C.,2 re- BY CLINTON WAHLEN flects a pre-Christian, Jewish belief in a messiah who would die, Media attention has recently spotlighted rise again after three days, and be exalted to heaven.3 a sensational interpretation of what has been Knohl’s reading of this tablet raises a number of questions, dubbed “Gabriel’s Vision” and “a Dead Sea not the least of which is why a similar messianic conception by Scroll on stone.”1 Israel Knohl, Professor at Jesus would be so unintelligible to the twelve disciples. It could Hebrew University in Jerusalem, claims that be argued that if the idea of a dying messiah was current the disciples were unwilling to accept it in reference to Jesus,4 or that such a notion was not widespread. The impression given by the four Gospels is that Jesus’ death was seen by onlookers as proof positive against any messianic claim.5 Knohl, while not directly addressing such questions, understands Jesus’ reference to Ps 110 (Mark 12:35-37) as a rejection of the triumphant messiah model in favor of one that “involves suffering and death.”6 Unfortunately, like several other sensational “discoveries” in recent years, the messiah stone is unprovenanced. That is, instead of being excavated by archaeologists, who would then be able to confirm where it came from, verify its authenticity, date the inscription, and locate other clues that could shed light on the group that produced it, the stone was uncovered by traders and sold through the antiquities market to David Jeselsohn, a Swiss- Israeli collector. Further, the Hebrew text on which Knohl’s recon- struction is based is fragmentary at critical junctures and there is no agreement on what it actually means. As with the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves, the widely divergent readings and resultant translations show just how problematic the work of reconstructing such a text can be. Even when there is agreement on what words are to be reconstructed, differing opinions on their relation can lead to opposite conclusions as to what the text actually means.7 The main points at issue are portions of lines 16 (“My servant, David, asked from before Ephraim [?]”), 19 (“in three days you shall know…”), 21 (“this bad plant”), and 80-81 (“In three days …, I, Gabri’el …[?], / the Prince of Princes,…, nar- row holes (?) … […]…”).8 It should Table of Contents not be overlooked Messiah Stone Scrutinized...... 1 that lines 80-81 on Editorial ...... 2 which Knohl’s sug- Theological Focus...... 3 gestion depends the Universal Legal Justification and most, are particu- Vicarious Atonement...... 3 Scripture Applied...... 7 larly difficult to de- Is Jesus God? ...... 7 cipher as the verbs Book Notes ...... 9 are illegible. His Ellen White and Leadership ...... 9 translation of these “Prophetic Inspiration: “The Holy lines is: “by three Spirit at Work” (DVD)...... 9 9 Worldwide Highlights...... 10

Zev Radovan/www.BibleLandPictures.com days live….” Then, Page 2 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter October 2008

Editorial Messianic Stone Scrutinized (Continued from page 1) I would like to begin my work as the new editor of Reflections by an ingenious connection of the first by paying tribute to our colleague and friend, Dr. Ekkehardt Mueller, reference to three days with Ephraim as a who created this newsletter five years ago and has suffering and dying messiah (mostly based served as editor since that time. He will continue on ideas in later Jewish traditions)10 and making a contribution through his regular Bible “this bad plant” (line 21) with a “wicked” Study feature and occasional articles and editorials. and “false” messiah, Knohl argues that Reflections, read by Bible teachers, church admin- the person to whom Gabriel speaks “live/ istrators, and pastors throughout the world church, be resurrected!” is also a messianic figure has consistently expanded and enriched the church’s theological and (151). doctrinal understanding. As the church grows, so do the challenges to While Knohl’s hypothesis is carefully- theological unity in an increasingly divided world. Our subscription argued, each of his major points is specula- list is growing too and we want to encourage you to write to us, let tive. First, the reconstructions of “Ephraim” us know what you especially appreciate about Reflections as well as and “live” are questionable.11 Another how it might be improved. serious problem is his reading of the text You will probably notice some changes in this issue, especially in the light of Jewish traditions clearly in the upper left-hand corner of the front page. There you will see documented only hundreds of years after the Biblical Research Institute’s slightly updated logo, depicting the the time of Jesus (ca. AD 400-650).12 Fi- Scriptures as our source of light and wisdom. The design of Reflec- nally, Knohl’s linkage of widely separated tions has been correspondingly updated as well. and partial lines of text into one coherent Each issue will feature an editorial by one of the scholars at the idea rests on many unproved (and largely Biblical Research Institute, affording a more direct line of commu- unprovable) assumptions about the identifi- nication from BRI to you, our readers. There is also a new section cation, meaning and connections of words which facilitates communication from our readers to the BRI and the in this inscription. rest of the world church. It is called “Worldwide Highlights” which It is much easier to make headlines contains news items of theological happenings relevant to the world with sensational claims than to convinc- church. These are necessarily brief so as to include include a larger ingly demonstrate the truth of those claims. number in each issue. Upon closer scrutiny, the stone nowhere We at BRI appreciate your reading of Reflections and welcome makes reference to a messiah of any kind, your input. Please, take a moment to write to us and let us know how good or bad. Nor is the reference to three we can better serve you. Also, we encourage you to visit our website, days clearly a reference to resurrection. In www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org, where you will find additional fact, the number three is mentioned a total free resources as well as books and other publications which can be of at least twelve times in this short inscrip- ordered. tion, including references to three prophets (lines 15, 70), three saints (line 65), three Clinton Wahlen, BRI shepherds (line 75), and (probably) three

Purpose Reflections is the official newsletter of the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference. Published quarterly, it seeks to share informa- tion concerning doctrinal and theological developments among Adventists and to foster doctrinal and theological unity in the world church. Its intended audience is church administrators, church leaders, pastors, and teachers.

Submission Guidelines Articles for Theological Focus, which address current issues that are important for Adventist theology, are written at the invitation of BRI and should not exceed 2,500 words. All invited submissions should follow the Chicago Manual of Style in general matters and The SBL Handbook of Style for more specialized questions, including abbreviations of primary and secondary sources and the transliteration of ancient texts according to the general-purpose style. They should be sent by e-mail as word processing document attachments to the editor at brinewsletter@ gc.adventist.org.

Biblical Research Institute  General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists® 12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, MD 20904, USA Website: www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org; phone: 301.680.6790  fax: 301.680.6788 E-mail: [email protected] Editor: Clinton Wahlen, Ph.D.  Production Manager: Marlene Bacchus Editorial Committee: Ángel M. Rodríguez, Th.D., Kwabena Donkor, Ph.D., Ekkehardt Mueller, Th.D., Gerhard Pfandl, Ph.D.

Copyright © Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists® Adventist® and Seventh-day Adventist® are the registered trademarks of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists®. October 2008 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter Page 3 signs (line 79). Too much weight is placed on the refer- Theological Focus ence to “three days,” a stereotypical period of time mentioned no less than 42 times in the Hebrew Bible (more than twice as often as references to “forty days”). There Universal Legal Justification are just too many gaps in the text and too many points and Vicarious Atonement at which Knohl’s hypothesis rests on gratuitous assump- BY STEPHEN BAUER tions about what the text reads and what the text means. While Jesus seems to have referred to OT prophecies of Like the first-century church, Adventism has vary- a suffering messianic figure (Mark 10:45; Luke 24:25- ing theories of the doctrine of salvation circulating in its 27), the messiah stone provides no compelling evidence midst. One theory currently in circulation is the doctrine for a pre-Christian, Jewish tradition of a dying messiah of Universal Legal Justification [ULJ], advocated by resurrecting in three days. the 1888 Study Committee and Jack Sequeira. The core of ULJ appears to be the assertion that Christ’s death has actually altered the legal standing of all humans 1 See, for example, “Ancient Tablet Ignites Debate on Mes- with God. ULJ asserts that all humans were forensi- siah and Resurrection,” New York Times, July 6, 2008; online: cally justified in His sight prior to any exercise of faith http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/middleeast/06stone. in Christ by the individual. Hence, justification by faith html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=all 2 Ada Yardeni and Binyamin Elitzur, “Document: A First-Century is reduced to being the subjective realization of one’s BCE Prophetic Text Written on a Stone; First Publication,” Cathe- standing with God which is already established. ULJ dra 123 (2007): 155–66 (in Hebrew). stands on two theological pillars: The mechanism by 3 Israel Knohl, “‘By Three Days, Live’: Messiahs, Resurrection, which Jesus bears our sins, and the doctrine of man. If and Ascent to Heaven in Hazon Gabriel” JR 88 (2008): 147-58. either of these pillars prove faulty, the doctrine of ULJ He claims that the stone confirms his hypothesis that “the char- will be undermined. ULJ is theologically complex and acter of the Messiah son of Joseph and the tradition of his killing intricate. Hence, in the scope of this article, I can only were created in the late first century BCE or the early first century CE” (149); see idem, “On ‘the Son of God,’ Armilus, and Mes- briefly consider the first issue, how Jesus bears our sins. siah Son of Joseph,” Tarbiz 68 (1998): 13–38 (in Hebrew with an How does Jesus actually bear our sins? Both the English abstract); idem, The Messiah before Jesus: The Suffering 1888 Study Committee and Jack Sequeira reject a vicari- Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Berkeley, Calif.: University of ous atonement model. Vicarious atonement means a California Press, 2000. one-for-one representation, in which Christ is understood 4 So William Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ to personally represent you individually on the cross as (London: SCM, 1998), 33. 5 Cf. Markus Bockmuehl, This Jesus: Martyr, Lord, Messiah your personal representative and substitute. Christ thus (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994), 55. bears our sins through a transfer of sin from sinner to 6 Israel Knohl, “The Messiah Son of Joseph: ‘Gabriel’s Revelation’ substitute, as seen in the symbolism of the Mosaic sanc- and the Birth of a New Messianic Model,” Biblical Archaeology tuary. It is this model of vicarious representation – espe- Review 34, no. 5 (September/October 2008): 58-62, 78 here 62. cially the concept of the transfer of sin – that is rejected 7 For an example of this in connection with 1QS IV.21-22, see by the 1888 Study Committee and Sequeira. Clinton Wahlen, Jesus and the Impurity of Spirits in the Synoptic Gospels (WUNT 2/185; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 46. In a short article in the 1888 Study Committee news- 8 Yardeni’s Hebrew transcription and English translation of the letter, an unspecified author opines, text used here may be found online at http://www.bib-arch.org/ It is interesting that the word “vicarious” ap- images/DSS-stone-hebrew.jpg and http://www.bib-arch.org/news/ dssinstone_english.pdf respectively (brackets hers). Her drawing pears nowhere in the Bible, nor did Ellen White of the inscription may be found at: http://www.nfc.co.il/upload- use it in any of her books. The Bible does not FIles/848324000835419.pdf. teach vicarious substitution, but a shared sub- 9 Ada Yardeni has recently agreed with Knohl’s recon- stitution. There is a big difference! The former struction of this word (online: http://www.daylife.com/ is the evangelical idea, the latter is the 1888 photo/0fnO1pW05I2yC). message idea. There has been much confu- 10 Esp. b. Sukkah 52a; Pesiq. Rab. 36; Sefer Zerubbabel. 11 “Ephraim” does not appear to be the only possible reading, sion and even misrepresentation on the part of according to Yardeni. With regard to “live,” Knohl reconstructs sincere people. A clear statement of the Bible the Hebrew verb as kh’yh, arguing its equivalency to khyh on the idea follows.1 basis that aleph appears in 1QIsa as a vowel, though this form of khyh is not established in any extant Hebrew text outside of this What then follows is an excerpt from Jack Sequeira postulated use in the messiah stone. in which he asserts, 12 Knohl also refers to T. Benj. 3.8 but to what extent this and The concept of substitutionary atonement other portions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs derives from Jewish, Jewish-Christian or Gentile-Christian origin con- presently taught by evangelical Christianity, tinues to be debated as the “testaments” found at Qumran (e.g. as well as within Adventism, does not take us 4Q215, 4Q541) do not show a clear connection to these traditions. far enough in understanding the profound truth Page 4 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter October 2008

of the atonement, especially as taught by the vicarious representation to an alternative view, that Ellen apostle Paul. . . . Christ did not die so that in White would still be affirming the vicarious model of exchange we might live; rather he died as us in atonement four years later. Perhaps she recognized that order that we might by faith share in His death the original 1888 message advocated a vicarious model and resurrection.2 of the atonement, unlike the present self-styled practitio- ners of the 1888 message. Sequeira speaks of vicarious substitution as the concept E.J. Waggoner seems to affirm the vicarious nature of exchanged experience while “shared” or “actual” sub- of the atonement in his open letter to GC President G. I. stitution teaches the concept of a shared experience be- Butler, published in late 1888 shortly after the General tween Christ and man.3 Thus, he says Christ dies “as us” Conference session. In his response to Butler, Waggoner in contrast to dying for us. Elsewhere, Sequeira better argues, “Paul says that the preaching of the cross is to explains the grounds of rejecting the vicarious model, by some people foolishness, or absurd, and I have often appealing to Roman Catholic criticism of the Reforma- heard people ridicule the idea that the death of one tion gospel. “As the Catholic theologians pointed out, it person could atone for the sins of another. They call is a fundamental principle of such an idea absurd, yet to you and all law, God’s or man’s, that Sequeira uses arguments designed me it is perfectly consistent with guilt or punishment can- reason.”7 Notice Waggoner’s use not be transferred from the to overthrow the gospel preached of the language of vicarious repre- guilty to the innocent, nor by Luther and other Reformers, sentation: “the idea that the death can the righteousness of one with its vicarious atonement model. of one person could atone for the person be legally transferred sins of another.” 4 to another.” Waggoner’s support for the vi- Sequeira is using arguments designed to overthrow carious model of atonement is openly demonstrated thir- the gospel preached by Luther and other Reformers ty pages later. Waggoner asks, “Again; why was Jesus with its vicarious atonement model. By contrast, Ellen baptized? He said that it was ‘to fulfill all righteousness.’ White makes strong and enthusiastic remarks concern- We may not say that it was simply as an example; for 5 ing Luther’s recovery of the gospel. By using Sequeira that would be really denying the vicarious nature of the to make a fuller explanation, the 1888 Study Committee atonement.”8 Waggoner is clearly concerned that But- de facto becomes dependent on Sequeira’s deeper points ler’s position would undermine “the vicarious nature of of argument. the atonement.” Why would Waggoner be so concerned While it is true that Ellen White never uses “vicari- about undermining the vicarious nature of atonement if ous” in any of her books, she does use the term in a his Minneapolis message was based on abandoning the Review and Herald article, and this singular use is of vicarious model for another? This is most interesting great significance: for if Waggoner advocated vicarious atonement in 1888, Christ came to reveal to the world the knowl- how is it that his name is now associated with a rejection edge of the character of God, of which the world of the vicarious model? The answer may lie in the fact was destitute. This knowledge was the chief that Waggoner changed to a more pantheistic model of treasure which he committed to his disciples the atonement by 1900. to be communicated to men. The truth of God In his 1900 volume, The Glad Tidings, Waggoner had been hidden beneath a mass of tradition and argues that Christ bears sin continuously instead of error. The sacrificial offerings which had been once for all on the Cross. Waggoner comes to this instituted to teach men concerning the vicarious conclusion by arguing that all things are under the atonement of Christ, to teach them that without curse, which brings death, and yet all things still live. the shedding of blood there is no remission of Waggoner concludes, “Therefore, the fact that we see life everywhere . . . is positive proof that the cross of sins, had become to them a stumbling-block. All 9 that was spiritual and holy was perverted to their the Crucified One is there bearing it.” Later he adds, darkened understanding.6 “Christ is crucified in the sinner, for wherever there is sin and the curse, there is Christ bearing it.”10 Notice Notice that for Ellen White, the sacrificial system of the that Waggoner’s language is one of a present, ongoing Old Testament was designed to teach men about “the bearing of sin by a personal presence of Christ in the vicarious atonement of Christ.” Furthermore, her af- sinner. In addition, the crown of thorns is asserted to firmation of the vicarious nature of the atonement came represent Christ as bearing all of nature’s weakness due in 1892, four years after the events of 1888 in Minne- to sin. Christ thus must be in all of nature bearing sin apolis. It seems odd that if the 1888 message was built to keep it alive.11 Christ bears sin primarily through a on changing the central model of the atonement from personal presence in the ontological substance of man October 2008 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter Page 5 and nature, throughout history. The pantheistic overtones exclamation in verse eight that Christ died for us while of this atonement model are obvious, but come naturally we were still His enemies. The use of “for” (hyper) when sin is treated more as an infused substance than leaves no doubt that Christ was not dying as us or with the reining power of Romans 5-7. us, but for us, in our place, like the one who would die Waggoner’s new model of how Christ bears sins is for the good man. Verse 7 leaves no other option than significant. This is because it is the pantheistic Wag- the vicarious model for how we interpret v. 8. goner who has abandoned the vicarious model of Having surveyed some issues centering on vicari- atonement he held twelve years earlier. It is suggestive ous substitution, let us now turn our attention to the that the 1888 Study Committee, in their rejection of the transfer of sin. We have seen that rejecting the vicarious vicarious model of atonement, may be patterning their model brings an accompanying rejection of the concept doctrine from the later Waggoner while trying to sift out of transferring sin. What happens to the doctrine of the the pantheistic elements. It seems, however, that it was sanctuary if the transfer of sin is rejected as being illegal precisely Waggoner’s pantheistic tendencies that caused and unethical? him to abandon the vicarious model and join forces The sanctuary doctrine, which is well-supported with Kellogg. Ellen White responded to Kellogg’s view biblically, is grounded in the principle of the transfer of of Christ being in sinners and in nature by saying, “in sin from sinner to substitute.14 For example, Ellen White Living Temple the assertion is made that God is in the explains the basic elements of the Sanctuary in terms of flower, in the leaf, in the sinner. But God does not live a transfer of sin: in the sinner. The Word declares that He abides only Day by day the repentant sinner brought his of- in the hearts of those who love Him and do righteous- fering to the door of the tabernacle and, placing ness. God does not abide in the heart of the sinner; it is his hand upon the victim’s head, confessed his the enemy who abides there.”12 These comments seem sins, thus in figure transferring them from him- equally contrary to Waggoner’s pantheistic assertions in self to the innocent sacrifice. . . . As anciently Glad Tidings.13 By refuting Kellogg as being contrary the sins of the people were by faith placed to Scripture, Ellen White brings us to another question: upon the sin offering and through its blood What insights can be found in Scripture about vicarious transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary, substitution? so in the new covenant the sins of the repentant Christ, describing His mission, said that a man are by faith placed upon Christ and transferred, can show no greater love than to “die for his friends” in fact, to the heavenly sanctuary.15 (John 15:13). This is remarkably similar language to His earlier comment, “and I lay down my life for the Elsewhere she notes: “The most important part of the sheep” (John 10:15). “For” is not the conjunction hōs daily ministration was the service performed in behalf (as) but, rather, is the preposition hyper (for). In these of individuals. The repentant sinner brought his offer- two passages, as well as in other places, Christ depicts ing to the door of the tabernacle, and, placing his hand His death as a death for, that is, in place of us, not as us. upon the victim’s head, confessed his sins, thus in figure When one lays down his life for friends, he is not dying transferring them from himself to the innocent sacri- as them or with them. He dies for them, and presumably, fice.”16 She also applies the concept of the transfer of would die for one friend, not just two or more friends. sin to the Lord’s goat on the Day of Atonement.17 Ellen Likewise the shepherd is ready to die, not as His sheep White applies the transfer model to our sins and Christ: or with His sheep, but for His sheep – whether one sheep “The Lord imputes unto the believer the righteous- or many sheep. Both friends and sheep are saved from ness of Christ and pronounces him righteous before the dying by the friend or shepherd universe. He transfers his sins to who dies for them. Hence there is a Jesus, the sinner’s representative, clear inference favoring a vicarious Christ and Paul both use substitute, and surety. Upon Christ understanding of the death of Christ vicarious models to explain He lays the iniquity of every soul as a personal replacement, the one substitution. that believeth. ‘He hath made him dying in place of His friend to save to be sin for us, who knew no sin; the friend’s life. that we might be made the right- Paul, in Romans 5:7, mirrors Christ’s teaching by eousness of God in him’ (2 Cor 5:21).”18 By contrast, it making an analogy of the death of Christ for us using an is argued by Sequeira and the 1888 Study Committee explicitly vicarious illustration. “Why, one will hardly that such transferral is illegal and unethical.19 It thus die for a righteous man—though perhaps for a good seems that to deny the transfer of sin is to squarely man one will dare even to die.” Here we have a direct, contradict the early SDA sanctuary doctrine, especially one-for-one substitution being presented—a vicarious as articulated by Ellen White. Without the transfer death. One dies for another individual. This sets up the of sin in a vicarious representation model, the sanctu- Page 6 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter October 2008 ary doctrine which launched the SDA Church cannot 12 White, 1SAT 343. remain a viable belief. It must either undergo significant 13 On Waggoner’s transition in his view of the atonement, see modification20 or be discarded. The jugular vein of ULJ Woodrow Whidden, “Universal Legal Justification in the Writings of E. J. Waggoner,” Reflections, no. 22 (April 2008): 6-9. I have is the rejection of the vicarious model of atonement and not researched the exact timeline of this development, but have the corresponding teaching of the transfer of sin from merely observed the significant difference in the contrasting posi- sinner to substitute. ULJ then, is at bottom, an argument tions published by one man twelve years apart. The significance attempting to reinterpret how Jesus bears our sins and is is in the differing positions, not in examining the process of how an attempt to replace the transfer mechanism and vicari- rapidly such a change occurred. 14 ous model of atonement with an alternative mechanism See the seven volumes produced by the Daniel and Revelation Committee, published by BRI. for bearing sin and an alternate atonement model.21 15 GC 418, 421. It seems clear that the rejection of the vicarious 16 PP 354 (emphasis supplied). atonement model raises perplexing challenges to the per- 17 PP 354; GC 420. spectives of both Scripture and Ellen White. Christ and 18 1SM 392 (emphasis supplied). Interestingly, Ellen White ties Paul both use vicarious models to explain substitution, this individualized, in-the-present declaration of justification to while Ellen White asserted that the Old Testament sanc- 2 Cor 5:21. While the next sentence affirms that “Christ made tuary service was intended to teach the vicarious model satisfaction for the guilt of the whole world,” she goes on to indicate that justification and salvation are conditioned on the of atonement. The first pillar upon which ULJ is depen- sinner’s faith response: “Although as sinners we are under the dent appears to have some serious structural deficiencies condemnation of the law, yet Christ by His obedience rendered that require further investigation. to the law, claims for the repentant soul the merit of His own righteousness. In order to obtain the righteousness of Christ, it is Dr. Stephen Bauer is Associate Professor of necessary for the sinner to know what that repentance is which Theology and Ethics at Southern Adventist works a radical change of mind and spirit and action.” Two University paragraphs later she adds “Christ pardons none but the penitent, but whom He pardons He first makes penitent. The provision made is complete, and the eternal righteousness of Christ is 1 Anonymous, “Glad Tidings,” 1888 Study Committee Newsletter placed to the account of every believing soul. The costly, spotless (May-August, 1999), 2. robe, woven in the loom of heaven, has been provided for the 2 Jack Sequeira, Saviour of the World (Boise, Idaho: Pacific repenting, believing sinner” (ibid., 393-394, emphasis supplied). Press, 1996), 134-135. It thus seems abundantly clear that for Ellen White justification 3 Ibid. is not something that happens in the past, but rather occurs at the 4 Jack Sequeira, Beyond Belief (Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press, present time when a sinner believes in Jesus. 1993), 40. The arguments on pp. 39-40 are heavily dependent on 19 Sequeira, Beyond Belief, 39-40; idem, Saviour, 84. Catholic criticisms of the Reformation gospel as being unethical. 20 See, e.g., Jack Sequeira, God’s Show and Tell: The Plan of The whole chapter is devoted to disproving a vicarious model of Redemption in the Sanctuary (no publishing data given), 5-7. atonement in order to replace it with the corporate model, which Sequeira applies the sanctuary typology to Christ himself. Christ is the basis of the doctrine of ULJ. Sequeira cites Deut 24:16 and does not minister in a sanctuary in heaven. He is the sanctuary Ezek 18:1-20 without any exposition. We cannot here address the who is in heaven. Any concept of fulfillment in a building in exegesis of these texts. See idem, Saviour of the World, 84, for heaven is rejected. This seems quite contrary to Heb 9-11 and to a similar assertion against vicarious representation, but without Ellen White’s views in EW 42, 252, 254; Ev 222; GW 22, 26; GC reference to Catholic theology. 420-422, 429. 5 For example, GC 157; ST June 21, 1883; EW 224-225; COL 78. 21 Heb 4:2 declares that the “gospel” was preached to the ancient 6 RH November 1, 1892 (emphasis supplied). Israelites but did them no good as it was not “mixed” with a re- 7 Ellet J. Waggoner, The Gospel in the Book of Galatians sponse of faith. How was the gospel preached to them? Heb 8-10 (Oakland, Calif.: n.p., 1888), 17. makes a solid case that the concepts of the gospel were conveyed 8 Waggoner, Galatians, 47. in symbols and types. The author of Hebrews frames the argu- 9 Ellet J. Waggoner, The Glad Tidings (Oakland, Calif.: Pacific ment that since certain things happened in the earthly type, we Press, 1900), 85 (emphasis supplied). The full argument is found know that certain things must happen in the antitypical ministry on pp. 84-91. of Christ (Heb 9:13-14, 23). The fundamentals of the gospel are 10 Ibid., 89 (emphasis supplied). depicted in the sanctuary and Paul asserts that salvation by faith is 11 Ibid., 85. indeed an Old Testament doctrine (2 Tim 3:15).

“Christ pardons none but the penitent, but whom He pardons He first makes penitent. The provision made is complete, and the eternal righteousness of Christ is placed to the account of every believing soul. The costly, spotless robe, woven in the loom of heaven, has been provided for the repenting, believing sinner” (1SM 393-394). October 2008 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter Page 7

Scripture Applied Is Jesus God? The first coming of Jesus posed a problem for those being confronted with Him. The question was: Who is this Jesus? Is He only human or is He also divine as He claimed? And, if so, how are we to understand God? Is God one, are there several Gods or do we find a plurality of divine persons in one God? This third view is suggested by Scrip- ture. It is essential to have a clear understanding of who Jesus is, in order to have a proper relationship with him. This is not just an academic question but a very practical issue having to do with our salvation.

I. The Divinity of Jesus

1. Jesus Is Called God John 1:1-3, 14 Jesus, “the Word,” is God and Human John 20:28 Jesus is called “My God” Heb 1:8-9 Jesus is God and anointed by God Col 2:9 Jesus is the fullness of the Deity Mark 2:5-11 Like God, Jesus Forgives Sins

2. Jesus Is Eternal Rev 1:8 (Father); 1:17-18 (Son); 21:6 (Father); 22:12, 13, 20 (Son) Both Father and Son are “Alpha and Omega” John 8:58-59; Isa 43:10-13; Exod 3:14 Jesus is the I Am Mic 5:2 Like the Father, Jesus is Eternal (Ps 90:2, 13) Isa 9:6 Jesus is called the everlasting Father Heb 1:8 Jesus’ throne is everlasting

3. Jesus Is Yahweh Matt 3:1, 3; Isa 40:3 Preparing the way for Jesus/Yahweh 1 Cor 10:4; Exod 13:21 The spiritual rock is Jesus/Yahweh John 12:37-41; Isa 6:1-3 The glory of Jesus is the glory of Yahweh John 6:46; Gen 17:1, 22; 35:9-13; Exod 6:2-3 Abraham, Jacob, and Moses saw Jesus John 19:37; Zech 12:10, 1, 8 Jesus/Yahweh is pierced

4. Jesus Is Worshiped Matt 28:9 Like God, Jesus is worshiped on earth Heb 1:6; Rev 5:8-9, 12-14 Jesus is worshiped by angels and in heaven 1 Cor 1:2 Christians call on the name of Jesus John 14:14 Christians are to pray in the name of Jesus Acts 7:58-59 Stephen prays to Jesus

II. Problematic Texts

1. Rev 3:14–Jesus, “the Beginning of God’s Creation” It is claimed that Jesus was God’s first work of creation. • The Greek word (archē) can be translated “beginning,” “origin,” “first cause” or “ruler.” The Father himself is called the “beginning” in Rev 21:6. The same title is used for Jesus in Rev 22:13. Jesus is not the first created being but is Himself the Creator. Page 8 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter October 2008

2. Col 1:15–Jesus, “the Firstborn of All Creation” Since Jesus is called the “firstborn,” it is argued that he was born. • According to v. 16 everything is created by Jesus. Therefore, He cannot Himself be a created being. • The Bible writers sometimes use “firstborn” in a special way. David, though youngest, is called the firstborn— Ps 89:20, 27. The second line of the parallelism tells us that this title means “most exalted king.” The firstborn was the leader of a group or tribe, the priest of the family, and received twice the inheritance of his brothers. Sometimes, the idea of being born first did not play a role. Jacob (Gen 25:25-26 and Exod 4:22) and Ephraim (Gen 41:50-52 and Jer 31:9), though not born first, are also “firstborn.” More crucial than birth order was the special rank and dignity of the person given the title “firstborn.” Jesus, is called firstborn not because He was the firstborn of Mary but because of all creation, His is the birth that matters most and because He holds the exalted position of King of kings over all creation.

3. John 1:1-3–Jesus as God It is claimed that there is a distinction in quality between God the Father, who is the Almighty God, and Jesus, who is only a god. John 1:1 reads: “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with ho theos, and the Word was theos.” • The Greek term for God–theos–is found with the article (ho theos–“the God”) or without the article (theos–“a god” or “God”). In John 1:1-3 the Father is named ho theos whereas the son is called theos. Is it justified to claim, based on this observation, that the Father is God Almighty whereas the Son is only a god? • When the term theos is used for the Father, it is not only used with the article but oftentimes also without the article–theos (even in the very same chapter: John 1:6, 13, 18; see also Luke 2:14; Acts 5:39; 1 Thess 2:5; 1 John 4:12; and 2 John 1:9). Jesus is also the God, theos with the article (Heb 1:8-9; John 20:28). In other words, whether “God” has the article or not has nothing to do with their nature as deity. • Had John always used the definite article with theos, it would mean that there is only one divine person: the Father would be the Son. In John 1:1, in order to talk about two separate persons of the Godhead, John had no other choice than to use ho theos (God with the article) and the next time to employ theos without the article. The absence of the article is not a valid argument against the equality and unity of the Father and the Son.

4. John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9–Jesus, the One and Only Son It is suggested that the word monogenēs points to a literal begetting of Jesus and should be translated “only begotten.” Like “firstborn,” it is important to see the word’s range of meaning. • The same term occurs also in Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38 and points to an only child. • Isaac is called Abraham’s monogenēs son in Heb 11:17. While Isaac was not Abraham’s only son, he was unique as Abraham’s “son of promise.” In light of these verses, together with the references in John and 1 John (the only other verses in the NT that use the Greek term), we conclude that “only” or “unique” is better than “only begotten” as a translation of monogenēs. • The normal term for begotten, gegennēka, is found in Heb 1:5 and points either to Christ’s resurrection or incar- nation. • Perhaps the other evangelists did not use monogenēs because agapētos “beloved” is another way to translate the same Hebrew word (see Mark 1:11 in connection with Christ’s baptism). The two words may sometimes be close in meaning.

III. Conclusion

Jesus is God as the Father is God. We understand Him to be equal with the Father in quality but not in function. The Son is to be honored as the Father is honored–John 5:23. A wrong understanding of the Son can lead to misun- derstanding the way of salvation (see 1 John 4:1-3). Had God offered even his best created being as a sacrifice for lost humanity yet not offered Himself, humans, angels, and the inhabitants of the universe might question His love and misunderstand the real motivation for obedience. In giving His Son, the Father also gave Himself because Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are eternally one. Understanding the nature of Jesus helps us to understand the how we are saved and why we must accept Him as our Savior and Lord. Ekkehardt Mueller, BRI October 2008 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter Page 9

Book Notes Her theory finds its point of departure in the person and ministry of Jesus and the work of the Spirit while Cindy Tutsch. Ellen White and incorporating an overarching worldview of the cosmic Leadership: Guidance for Those conflict. who Influence Others.(Nampa, This volume will be useful to church leaders at Idaho: Pacific Press, 2008). 159 every level of church administration as well as to Chris- pp. US$16.99. tians who are seeking to lead others to the Lord. Hope- Cindy Tutsch is one of the fully it will motivate others to explore and enrich the associate directors of the Ellen G. topic even more at a time when Christian leadership has White Estate, Silver Spring, Md. become a vital issue in the growing Adventist church. This volume makes an important Ángel Manuel Rodríguez, BRI contribution to the field of Chris- tian leadership and to the study of “Prophetic Inspiration: The Holy the writings of Ellen G. White. This is not only a study of Spirit at Work” (DVD), South what Ellen White had to say about leadership, but a com- Pacific Division of Seventh-day parative analysis of White’s understanding of Christian Adventists, Wahroonga, NSW, leadership and what writers on the topic are saying today. Australia. The results are significant. Tutsch found that White antici- The early history of the Sev- pated much of what we find in today’s leadership theories, enth-day Adventist Church was that at times her counsel opposes them, and that in some heavily influenced by the ministry instances her leadership principles are unique. The deci- of Ellen G. White (1827-1915). sion to refer to such leadership theories was based on the Through her ministry, God guided fact that “practical leadership literature in the genre that the fledgling church and protected it from many pitfalls. we know today was virtually nonexistence in the time of On the basis of her visions the educational and medical Ellen White” (p. 145). institutions and the health food work of the church were Tutsch defines a Christian leader as “anyone who established, and wherever and whenever her counsel was uses his or her influence to promote Christ” (p. 7). This followed the church prospered. Nevertheless, not long general definition leads her to conclude that any Chris- after her call as the Messenger of the Lord to the church, tian is called to be a leader. She finds in the writings of and ever since, critics from inside and outside the church Ellen G. White a set of core values for Christian leaders have cast doubt on her ministry and have questioned that includes the need of the Holy Spirit, Scripture study, her prophetic gift. In recent years, a number of websites character development, and prayer. The moral author- have sprung up that feature these criticisms, questioning ity of the leader is grounded in the servant leadership her inspiration and her role in the church. exemplified by Christ which, if carefully followed, could The Media Center of the South Pacific Division of prevent the abuse of authority. There are also practical Seventh-day Adventists in Australia is to be commended discussions dealing with how to develop proper human for the production of a two-hour DVD to counteract relations particularly in the areas of race, gender, age-in- these attacks on Ellen White’s inspiration. A number of clusiveness, mentoring, and caring for the poor. The last biblical scholars and church historians, primarily from chapter addresses the permanent value of Ellen White’s Australia, respond positively to these attacks by looking counsel on leadership and includes discussion of some at what the Bible has to say about prophetic inspiration. of the issues that we face today. Particularly useful is the The DVD is divided into the following five sections: (1) discussion of the qualifications of leaders. Throughout Ellen G. White – A Genuine Prophet; (2) The Role of the book Tutsch relies quite heavily on quotations from Ellen G. White – Relationship to the Bible; (3) Prophets Ellen G. White, adding little commentary. These quota- are Persons – God Speaks Through People; (4) How tions are carefully chosen to illustrate the principles Inspiration Works – The Biblical Model; and (5) How to promoted by White. We also find examples from the Test a Prophet – Biblical Criteria. life and experience of Ellen White illustrating how she Due to the nature of the attacks, the DVD focuses applied these leadership principles in her own work as a heavily on the human element in the process of inspira- Christian leader. tion, both in Scripture and in Ellen White’s prophetic A summary chapter provides a more analytical ministry. It emphasizes that the biblical prophets and overview of Ellen White’s counsels on Christian leader- Ellen White were fallible human beings whose writings ship, pulling the book together with clarity and ethos. contain genuine discrepancies, but that these discrepan- It includes a very valuable discussion of Ellen White’s cies are minor and do not detract from their messages. theory of leadership which is based on personal account- By exploring the nature of inspiration in Scripture, ability to God and doing everything “as unto the Lord.” showing that biblical writers at times used uninspired Page 10 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter October 2008 sources and employed helpers in writing down the George B. Caird who wrote, “The prophet before all else divine revelations, the DVD helps the viewer to better is a man, and it is by the heightening of his normal hu- understand why Ellen White used uninspired source ma- man faculties that he attains his depth of insight. But like terial and secretaries to help her write down what God all men he is fallible. He may imperfectly understand revealed to her. the word spoken to him. He may lack the interpretive The DVD repeatedly emphasizes that God meets ability to make clear what he has seen.” The revelation- people where they are; that the prophets, as well as Ellen inspiration process is not simply the heightening of the White, were imperfect human beings with weaknesses; normal faculties of the prophet; it is much more than that they were children of their times and cultures, who that. And what a prophet may lack in natural ability had to grow in their understanding of God’s plan for God can supply so that the prophet can correctly convey mankind. Nevertheless, God used them; their messages God’s message to His people. were of divine origin and therefore trustworthy and The DVD is not afraid to tackle some of the difficult reliable. The Bible, it is said, is an infallible revelation issues in the writings of Ellen White, such as the shut of God’s will and fulfills the purpose for which it was door, the Israel Damon affair, and the amalgamation of given, in spite of certain discrepancies in the biblical man and beast; though not everyone will agree with the text. Such discrepancies in minor details, representing way these issues are handled and the answers it gives are the human element in the inspiration process, are incon- definitely not inspired. Nevertheless, the overall mes- sequential, the viewer is told. sage of the DVD comes through loud and clear: prophets Inconsequential on this DVD is certainly Ray Roen- are fallible human beings, but their messages have an nfeldt’s slip of the tongue that Luke received revelations infallible divine character. from God. Not so inconsequential is the quote from Gerhard Pfandl, BRI

Worldwide Highlights

Historic Steps Forward for AUA The Adventist University of Africa (AUA) for a number of years now has offered master’s programs in leadership and pas- toral theology on the campuses of Babcock, Baraton, and Solusi University. AUA was established to train leaders for the world church who are committed to the exposition of the Adventist faith in the context of Africa and African culture. Two staff members of the Biblical Research Institute, Drs. Kwabena Donkor and Gerhard Pfandl, have taught courses in systematic theology on the above Signing the letter of interim authority is the Chairman of the Kenya Commission on Higher Education with Dr. named campuses for AUA. Pardon Mwansa, GC Vice President, looking on. On May 9, the Kenya Commis- sion on Higher Education granted AUA a Letter of Interim Authority, expressing satisfaction at the prog- ress of the university and challeng- ing the institution to research issues way for the eventual granting of a full charter. And on August 24, Elder Jan related to the impact of Christianity Paulsen, president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, in Africa. The interim charter pro- took part in a ground breaking ceremony for several major buildings on the vides recognition and accredita- campus of AUA in Nairobi. This phase of the campus development includes tion of AUA programs as a private construction of a modern multi-floor library facility with lecture theaters and university in Kenya and paves the seminar rooms. Also planned are housing complexes for students and faculty. October 2008 Reflections – The BRI Newsletter Page 11

Adventist Presence and Influence sixth International SBL Congress held at the University of Auckland, New at SBL Meeting Zealand, July 6-11, 2008. Several Adventists also presented papers there, The Society of Biblical including four faculty members from the Adventist International Institute of Literature (SBL) fosters bibli- Advanced Studies (AIIAS): Yoshitaka Kobayashi, Richard Sabuin, Gerald cal scholarship on a global scale Klingbeil, a member of BRICOM, and his wife Chantal. Adventist participa- and attracts scholars from around tion in such meetings can help break down the prejudice that sometimes ex- the world to its major congresses ists toward our church as well as provide a prominent platform for communi- to present and discuss the latest cating our views to other Christian scholars. research, exchange ideas, network, and renew friendships. The wide Bible Symposium in Zambia spectrum of theology represented at A Bible symposium for all the pastors of the Zambia Union Mission such gatherings and the predomi- took place in April at an Adventist facility near Zambia Adventist Univer- nance of liberal viewpoints has not sity. Topics presented included Christ in the Book of Revelation, the good prevented Adventist scholars from news about the judgment, challenges to Adventist theology, interpreting attending and exerting a positive Scripture, and the remnant in Revelation. Ekkehardt Mueller, represent- influence in some quarters. Tom ing BRI, was among the presenters. There was a wonderful spirit of unity Shepherd of Andrews Univer- among the attendees, and the conference was very well organized. Spouses sity chaired the Mark Group for a were also invited and their meetings addressed the challenges faced by the number of years. Beginning this pastor’s wife. year, he and Michael Chernick of Attendees heard the marvelous story of the providential way in which the Hebrew Union College (a non- church acquired the land and, most recently, was granted university status. Adventist institution) will co-chair When church leaders approached the government to request recognition for a new consultation on the “Sabbath the college, they were encouraged to apply for university status—which was in Text, Tradition, and Theology.” subsequently granted. Thus Zambia Adventist University became the first pri- Adventist scholars from such di- vately owned and operated university in Zambia, receiving recognition even verse places as Australia, Germany, before the Catholic university received it. The church in Zambia is advancing Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, and rapidly, thanks to the commitment, mission emphasis, and diligence of more South Africa attended the twenty- than half a million members in a country of approximately 11 million.